Monday, 16 December 2013

Gardasil ... to do it or not to do it.

Gardasil in the news. Quick update: Gardasil is a vaccine from Merck recommended for girls aged nine and up, boys aged twelve and up that is supposed to protect against a sexually transmitted virus called the Human Papilloma Virus or HPV. It is said that all cervical cancers start with HPV. One thing to remember ... not all cases of HPV result in cancer. There are about forty types or strains of the virus, most of which our amazing immune system-driven body fights off easily. Of 40 strains, Gardasil supposedly protects against four.

But there's a whole other side to this vaccine--and almost every other vaccine out there. Blanket coverage of everyone has irrefutably resulted in many vaccine-damaged people. These are facts.
We wouldn't have a National Vaccine Adverse Reaction site if this wasn't a common and factual thing. So like every other medical procedure, there are risks involved. It is these risks that are not being taken seriously or shared by those profiting or regulating Gardasil. That statement is spoken time after time in hospitals all over North America, and yet it's never spoken in relation to vaccines is it? Why not? Either they are incredibly sure that their product is risk-free or they are sure they have enough lawyers to crush any doubt. And don't forget polio or small pox! I can't help but think it matters that the man who created the Polio vaccine, Jonas Salk refused to patent it saying, "There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?". Such a far-from current reality statement, showing the purity of intention of past Scientific research. The intention today in many opinions is solely to make a profit. To raise stock prices. To fill pockets. This is the case with Gardasil I think.

Take the risk or don't--thank goodness it's still our choice. Here's another idea. We could teach those nine year old girls and those twelve year old boys to use protection when they have sex. We could teach them to be choosy, to ask questions, research whether a potential partner is active or not. Or ... warning graphic content to follow ~teach them that self-pleasure and yes masturbation is normal and healthy and oh-so-friggin good for your brain, your self-esteem, your confidence! My 11 year old niece came home with comprehension words to memorize, one of which was "Ethnocentric". So at 11 years of age, kids in Ontario Canada are supposed to know that ethnocentric means: "having the idea that your own group or culture is better or more important than others". But we can't expect them to comprehend or remember that if they have any form of sexual intercourse~protected or not~ with someone who has an STD, they will very likely get it and have it forever?

If you're willing to risk damage or even worse pay for this shot, then surely you'd be willing to drill this into your kids' head wouldn't you? Condoms don't protect from everything, but they protect a lot. And yes ... be personal, be graphic! Show them pics of genital warts or an oozing and painfully inflamed herpes outbreak! Show them the documentary "The Greater Good" and meet a young girl who is forever damaged by this vaccine. I know... extreme. But effective!!

Or you could give them a shot that has given almost 32,000 young girls adverse reactions; 133 of whom died. These are also facts, and it's been said that only 2% of all adverse reactions are reported!! Ugh ... can't even do the math there. Oh how far we've come from when I was young. The heavily Christian-influenced societal mentality surrounding condoms was very much that encouraging their use equaled encouraging sex. And now some thirty years later, we routinely give newborn babies Hep B shots and give adolescent children HPV shots long before sex is an issue. This would be fine, if the shot were risk-free. But it's not.

As with any medical procedure there are risks involved with Vaccines. That's all I want them to say.